Hi Denys and All :)
The point that Denys made is summed up by the simple but descriptive
name the Infantry has... "Queen of Battle" because it is critical to
victory and extremely agile and mobile... The Artilliery is called the
"King of Battle" crucial to victory... but very very immobile! For
reference... see the book (not the movie!!!!) "We Were Soldiers
Once...And Young" ... very good example of these points... also very good
examples of leadership... both good and bad.
Reference also on armor... how much is on a bird? versus an APC?
There are reasons we call APC's "rolling coffins" I will take the bird
any day over a APC...
As for body armor? hmmm.... I must admit ... would rather have the
ceramic if riding... but foot patrol? rather not wear much past the basic
vest... which slows me down enough (those things are not light!) Remember,
the basic load for a standard mission is measured in the 10's of pounds for
the average squad member... Hard to move fast for a prolonged period when
carrying 60+ pounds of gear... And the K-Pot? (Kevlar helmet) well...
ruins your hearing.. but does deflect projectiles well... if it is sized
properly...
Just a view from the inside ... there are always choices to be made and
they are not usually well articulated by any side in the media...
experience is the best articulator of such... and you have to raise your
right hand for that...
Art "just ramblin' like usual :) " Bahrs
P.S. Yes, I do know about self propelled Arty... still not fast or agile
compared to either a bird or a groundpounder :)
=======================================================
Art Bahrs, CISSP Information Security The Regence Group
(503) 225-4992 FAX (503) 220-3806
"Denys
Beauchemin"
<denysnospamwa To
[log in to unmask] [log in to unmask]
r.com> cc
Sent by:
"HP-3000 Subject
Systems Re: [HP3000-L] OT: The Century
Discussion" Ahead
<HP3000-L@RAVE
N.UTC.EDU>
01/16/2006
06:31 AM
Please respond
to
[log in to unmask]
rr.com
|------------|
| [ ] Secure |
| E-mail |
|------------|
Body armor has become an interesting issue in this war. If one looks to
history, at some point in the past, heavily armored soldiers were simply
submerged by far more agile opponents or more powerful weapons. The sun
set
on personal armor after the last knight fell, pun fully intended.
The only piece of body armor in use after that was the helmet; steel,
Kevlar, whatever. In WWII, bomber pilots and crew used flak jackets in an
attempt to ward off the fragments of shells exploding around, above and
mainly below them, which is why many pilots simply sat on their jackets.
The soldiers on the ground only had their helmets for armor. Of course,
tanks and other armored vehicles were used, but again these vehicles could
easily be overwhelmed and destroyed by infantry, which is why they never
advanced without covering infantry.
Tanks got progressively faster to the point they were actually able to
outrun the opposing infantry if need be. In more recent years, tanks have
become so well armored and agile they are able to advance without infantry
support but, tanks are not something you usually want in urban warfare, at
least not without infantry support. To help infantry keep up with faster
moving tanks, the APC (Armored Personnel Carrier) was developed and over
the
years has taken on many forms, culminating in the Bradley Fighting Vehicle
for the US military.
The HMMWV (High Mobility Multipurpose Wheeled Vehicle) or Humvee was
developed as the follow on to the Jeep of WWII, Korea and Vietnam fame.
The
Jeep was not armored in any way. It was meant to be fast, agile and
maneuverable. Some people of a certain age and beyond may recall the TV
program, The Rat Patrol. When tanks had to stop to aim and fire, they
could
get away with that; I would not try that nowadays.
The Humvee is a far superior vehicle compared to the Jeep, being extremely
agile, much faster and actually able to go in places which would have
stopped a Jeep cold. This incredible vehicle has proven itself well since
its introduction in the 1980s. It's one weakness is that it is not
armored,
it was not designed to be armored, check again what the first two letter of
its acronym stand for.
In Iraq, most Humvees have been up-armored to ward of EIDs use by
terrorists, but this has reduced its performance, agility and its
capability
to go virtually anywhere. The armor is heavy and so not all soldiers want
a
heavy Humvee.
In the US military personal armor came into vogue during and mostly after
Desert Storm. However, the issue becomes how much armor do you want to
carry and which body parts do you leave unarmored. Bulletproof vests worn
by police are classified by threat levels. Some can stop a handgun bullet
and a knife but are easily defeated (in this case, penetrated) by a rifle
bullet. Others can stop rifle bullets but they will weight you down and
they do not cover all sides or the neck and face. So, how much armor do
you
want to carry?
When the anti-gunners started making a big fuss about bullets that could
penetrate bulletproof vests currently worn by police, they actually got
more
cops killed because they made the criminals aware of the fact police had
bulletproof vests, the criminals started to aim for unprotected areas.
(You
may also remember the Lethal Weapon movie where a "cop-killer" handgun
bullet was able to easily penetrate a bulldozer blade. Yeah, there's
reality for you.)
So now the anti-Iraqi Freedom folks are making a big stink about body
armor,
detailing as much as possible which parts of the body are covered and which
are not and what it takes to penetrate the existing armor. That is very
supportive of the troops in harm's way right now, not. I would suggest the
concern expressed by these people is totally faked and meant to harm the
troops by providing information to the enemy. Which is why we see soldiers
shot at with an RPG instead of a rifle.
These activists are only interested in doing anything they can to embarrass
the administration and if soldiers die because of their actions, well
that's
just too bad. To them, making Bush look inept is far more important than a
few soldiers' lives and since the military votes Republican by a wide
margin, they deserve what they get. (Trust me, I check out The Daily Kaos
every once in a while. I know what the mainstream liberals are saying.)
I came across this report:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060108/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/iraq_body_armor
US Soldiers Question Use of More Armor. Read it all.
Denys
-----Original Message-----
From: HP-3000 Systems Discussion [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf
Of Johnson, Tracy
Sent: Friday, January 13, 2006 9:51 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [HP3000-L] OT: The Century Ahead
That's because they're working on the Bleex2.
http://www.realtechnews.com/posts/2384
http://bleex.me.berkeley.edu/bleex.htm
http://www.gizmag.com/go/2683/
Tracy Johnson
Measurement Specialties, Inc.
* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *
=============================================================================
IMPORTANT NOTICE: This communication, including any attachment, contains information that may be confidential or privileged, and is intended solely for the entity or individual to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you should delete this message and are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, or distribution of this message is strictly prohibited. Nothing in this email, including any attachment, is intended to be a legally binding signature.
=============================================================================
* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *
|
